http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1261679

Wow...if true Baylor ain't letting go..

Oh boy. . . . . .

Seriously? So all Baylor has to do is say "nah, we don't want to waive our right to sue" and A&M is stuck?

Is this the SEC's roundabout way of backtracking after second thoughts about expansion?

Quote:ChuckCarltonDMN Chuck Carlton
Source indicated Baylor is still suggesting "tortious interference" claim as a possibility against both the SEC and Mike Slive personally.

Looks like that Aggie who re-wrote the lyrics to "American Pie" had it right:

Quote:So come on: Ags be nimble, Ags be quick!
Ken Starr pulled out a legal trick
Cause court rooms are the devil's only friend.

How funny would it be if after all this fuss, nothing happens.

Can you imagine being in a conference you were forced to stay in though? I don't see that being productive. That is just asking for more instability.

Funny to us. Not to A&M. After the way the A&M administration has pumped up their fans and supporters, if the Aggies meekly surrender and crawl back to the Big 12 just because Baylor "suggested" it might sue somebody, without even making them actually file a lawsuit and win it, then the A&M president might not be the A&M president for much longer.

We have heard for a month-

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't A&M do what is in it's best interest?"

IF this is true... (and that is a very big if) we will see that phrase flipped around.

"So what if it doesn't benefit A&M as much, why shouldn't Baylor do what is in it's best interest?"

(09-07-2011 12:49 AM)TomThumb Wrote:  Seriously? So all Baylor has to do is say "nah, we don't want to waive our right to sue" and A&M is stuck?

That would quite possibly be the funniest thing to ever happen in the world of college sports.

(09-07-2011 01:13 AM)Sammy11 Wrote:  We have heard for a month-

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't A&M do what is in it's best interest?"

IF this is true... (and that is a very big if) we will see that phrase flipped around.

"So what if it doesn't benefit A&M as much, why shouldn't Baylor do what is in it's best interest?"

I'm just throwing this out there, I know it won't happen, but what if every SEC school threatens to sue Baylor if they don't sign.....

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't us SEC schools do what's in our best interests?"

Disclaimer: I have nothing against Baylor, just bringing up the idea.

I don't see this as being successful. You can't imprison a school forever. There will come a day they are allowed to leave even if you do win and in the meantime you've ruined a relationship and gained a bad reputation.

There are withdrawal procedures and precedence has been set last year that you are allowed to leave the conference.

Hey, hey, hey, this WHOLE thing can be taken care of peacefully and gentleman like. Just get Baylor, the SEC, and the Big East/ACC together. As long as the SEC agrees to stop at A&M and Missouri the Big East will agree to take Baylor and Iowa State in addition to Kansas and Kansas State. Everybody gets a home, no lawsuits are filed.

Seriously, that's kind of what Baylor is thinking, they're screwed if this goes down.

(09-07-2011 01:20 AM)Ron7098 Wrote:  

(09-07-2011 01:13 AM)Sammy11 Wrote:  We have heard for a month-

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't A&M do what is in it's best interest?"

IF this is true... (and that is a very big if) we will see that phrase flipped around.

"So what if it doesn't benefit A&M as much, why shouldn't Baylor do what is in it's best interest?"

I'm just throwing this out there, I know it won't happen, but what if every SEC school threatens to sue Baylor if they don't sign.....

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't us SEC schools do what's in our best interests?"

Disclaimer: I have nothing against Baylor, just bringing up the idea.

On what grounds? Not waiving a right to sue someone interfering with a contract? The SEC is putting this restriction in place themselves, how can they sue us?

Is Baylor going to sue Colorado and Nebraska too?

(09-07-2011 01:22 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I don't see this as being successful. You can't imprison a school forever. There will come a day they are allowed to leave even if you do win and in the meantime you've ruined a relationship and gained a bad reputation.

There are withdrawal procedures and precedence has been set last year that you are allowed to leave the conference.

They're not imprisoned. They're free to leave any time they want.

It's just that the SEC doesn't want any part of them if it involves being dragged through a lawsuit.

It seems clear that the SEC isn't desperate to expand. They're just not highly motivated. What they're saying is that it would be nice to get A&M if they can as long as there's no fuss & no muss. But at the slightest sign of a problem, they're bailing.

(09-07-2011 01:31 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  Is Baylor going to sue Colorado and Nebraska too?

And Oklahoma and Oklahoma State while they're at it?

Same situation for the BE. If SEC does invite WVU from the BE when there are more suitable candidates available from the B12 and the ACC, then there could be a huge lawsuit involved from the remaining BE schools. I find it extremely puzzling for the SEC to all suddenly be interested in WVU before they go after UNC, VATECH, NCST, Missouri etc. If ESPN is even slightly involved with the SEC to damage the BE right before BE is about to negotiate the biggest TV deal in its history, there could be a huge huge lawsuit against the ESPN and the SEC. Since BE will most likely be signing with NBC/COMCAST, this could be ESPN's way of damaging its competition since ESPN is basically in bed with the SEC.

ESPN being in state of CT would not help them either. CT state attorney would not hesitate to protect the state's flagship university if ESPN is involved trying to damage the BE to screw up BE's future TV negotiation.

How can the SEC sue Baylor? The waiver apparently says that each school has the right to agree to waive or not. The difference between A&M and Colorado and Nebraska are two-fold, 1.)A&M is a state school, 2.)Baylor could argue that A&M's move lead directly to the destruction of the conference while Colorado and Nebraska leaving actually lead to a great TV contract. No A&M leaving, in Baylor theory, lead directly to Oklahoma and Texas wanting to leave the conference. Not that I'm agreeing with Baylor or disagreeing with them, just playing devil's advocate.

(09-07-2011 01:26 AM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(09-07-2011 01:20 AM)Ron7098 Wrote:  

(09-07-2011 01:13 AM)Sammy11 Wrote:  We have heard for a month-

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't A&M do what is in it's best interest?"

IF this is true... (and that is a very big if) we will see that phrase flipped around.

"So what if it doesn't benefit A&M as much, why shouldn't Baylor do what is in it's best interest?"

I'm just throwing this out there, I know it won't happen, but what if every SEC school threatens to sue Baylor if they don't sign.....

"So what if it doesn't benefit Baylor as much, why shouldn't us SEC schools do what's in our best interests?"

Disclaimer: I have nothing against Baylor, just bringing up the idea.

On what grounds? Not waiving a right to sue someone interfering with a contract? The SEC is putting this restriction in place themselves, how can they sue us?

Each conference has exit clauses, and if Texas A&M did everything per the conference bylaws, there shouldn't be any lawsuits, period. Now if Texas A&M didn't go by the rules that they agreed to, then yeah, I think they deserve to be sued.

If you don't want a school leaving your conference, put in the conference bylaws that you can't leave. Don't think any school would sign something like that. But you can't expect to have exit clauses in the contract and then when someone wants out and goes by the rules that now the tables have turned and they can't leave because one school is upset and is threatening litigation.